Sensor Fusion Integrity Evaluation for Autonomous Driving

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current autonomous vehicle systems face challenges in reliably detecting and mitigating sensor deficiencies, such as erroneous measurements and false positives/negatives, which can lead to safety-critical issues during operation.

Innovation Solution

A method to determine and evaluate detection conditions across various sensor systems, using integrity and confidence values to assess the reliability of sensor data, thereby enhancing the safety integrity and robustness of surroundings detection by weighting sensor information accordingly.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If sensor data fusion is performed without evaluating detection conditions, then the processing speed is maintained, but the reliability of the surroundings model deteriorates due to sensor deficiencies

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereliability of surroundings modelVSAvoidcomplexity of detection condition evaluation
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by determining evaluation values for detection conditions before performing sensor data fusion. The system evaluates detection conditions (such as weather, lighting, sensor status) in advance and stores these evaluation values, which are then used during the fusion process to weight sensor data appropriately. This prevents sensor deficiencies from compromising the surroundings model while maintaining processing efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If multiple sensor modalities are used to cover 360 degrees of surroundings, then the measurement coverage is improved, but the complexity of fusing data from multiple sources increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecoverage of surroundings detectionVSAvoidcomplexity of sensor data fusion
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by assigning different evaluation values to different detection conditions and sensor modalities based on their specific characteristics and current state. Each sensor's data is weighted according to its own detection condition evaluation (e.g., camera data weighted differently in fog vs. clear weather, radar weighted differently in various scenarios). This allows the system to handle multiple sensor modalities effectively by treating each sensor's contribution locally and specifically rather than applying a uniform fusion approach.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Reliability

If sensor deficiencies are not evaluated, then the system operation is simple, but false positives and false negatives occur more frequently

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccuracy of sensor measurementsVSAvoidsimplicity of sensor evaluation process
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies self-service by having the sensor system automatically evaluate its own detection conditions and generate evaluation values without requiring external intervention. The system autonomously monitors its own operational state, sensor deficiencies, and environmental conditions, then uses this self-generated information to weight and fuse sensor data. This reduces operational complexity while significantly improving measurement accuracy by preventing false positives and negatives.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentUS20220277569A1Method for determining a fused sensor detection condition
Publication Date: 2022.09.01 ROBERT BOSCH GMBH
  • US20220277569A1 patent drawing
  • US20220277569A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method for determining an evaluated detection condition for an evaluation of sensor data. The method includes: providing a first integrity value of the detection condition, based on a first basis for determining the detection condition; providing a second integrity value of the detection condition, based on a second basis for determining the detection condition; determining an overall integrity value for the detection condition, based on the first integrity value and the second integrity value; assigning the overall integrity value to the detection condition for determining the evaluated detection condition.